Texas Gov. Perry indicted ...

originally posted by: Kaploink

originally posted by: xuenchen

Now we have some Left Wing Liberals saying this is weak !!

But don't fall for their malarkey.

They are simply distancing Obama and all the other Progressives from this Red Herring.

Funny just the same. I bet Obama is at least knee-deep in this one. He's jealous about the immigrants/National Guard issues for one.

Always be ware of the Democrat voting pocket areas.

Lots of Gila Monsters in holes.

If you lived in Texas, you would realize that the corrupt good old boy system controls Texas. Everyone knows that Perry is corrupt, but no Republican is willing to risk their careers by going after him.

The Democrat area you warn about is the only area willing to uphold the law in this case.

Funny thing to say, given that the area in question were the ones backing and defending the DA after being convicted and serving jail time. The same DA that tried to use her position to save her from the arrest and conviction...No, that's not unethical at all. Not corrupt. This DA was also trying to call in favors from the Sheriffs dept. What was that about the "good ole boy system?"

You are saying that it should be just fine and dandy for the head/leader of the group that investigates unethical and corrupt behavior in the state to attempt to use her position to save her from arrest and prosecution? That it is fine and dandy that she should be convicted and serve 45 days in jail and then return to that same position?

Don't we have enough of the "fox protecting the henhouse" going on now?

The fact that she would not resign and her cohorts would support her remaining in office speaks loudly to unethical behavior. The exact behavior she is charged to investigate.

This Woman is the District Attorney?
Listening to this video it sounds like she expected them to cal a Certain,,,,,, Judge,,,,,, and get out of the Whole DUI
Arrest,,,, Has this Happened Before? Hard to tell,,,, But she has a Friend and She Expected Him To Be Called!!!

This next one is Great to listen to her Lawyer LIE about the Officers Covered her Face with the None-Spitting Bag to Protect her Identity!!!



Austin Texas Residents, Are You Really Proud Of These Actions,,,, Even as Liberal as that city is,, She Was Drunk,,, Lady,,, Call A Taxi,,, or your Judge Friend to come and drive you!! You try to Drop his Name to get Out of The Arrest,,,,,, You kept asking, Did You Call Him?

a reply to: guohua

Holy eff!

'So you been arrested for DWI before'.

She replies,' That's y'alls problem. Not mine.'.

Wow.

After that I would say Perry was justified.

a reply to: buster2010

When prominent national Democrats are starting to speak up less than 24 hours later in calling the indictment "sketchy" (David Axelrod) and Jonathon Chait and Jonathan Turley are also saying it's a frivolous indictment based on nothing.

If this was a solid or even partially solid accusation, would these people be coming forward to say this is crap so quickly?

They say a prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, and this always seemed like hyperbole, until Friday night a Texas grand jury announced an indictment of governor Rick Perry. The “crime” for which Perry faces a sentence of 5 to 99 years in prison is vetoing funding for a state agency. The conventions of reporting — which treat the fact of an indictment as the primary news, and its merit as a secondary analytic question — make it difficult for people reading the news to grasp just how farfetched this indictment is.

....

The theory behind the indictment is flexible enough that almost any kind of political conflict could be defined as a “misuse” of power or “coercion” of one’s opponents. To describe the indictment as “frivolous” gives it far more credence than it deserves. Perry may not be much smarter than a ham sandwich, but he is exactly as guilty as one.

-- Patterico quoting Chait.

He then goes on to explain Texas legal statute and why it is not an abuse of power for Perry to line item veto funding for Lehmburg's office if she didn't resign. If you interpreted legal statute that broadly, Obama, for example, would not be able to threaten any of his officials with firing for failing to do their job because it would constitute a similar attempt to influence as what this indictment tries to charge Perry with.

When Obama threatens to veto anything brought to the table that he disagrees with before it even passes one or both houses of Congress, is that a similar kind of political coercion and also worthy of Grand Jury indictment now?

So, do you see maybe why liberals are walking away or taking a step back from this indictment? It could wind up looking bad for them, and to me it seems like merely a politically motivated way to tar another potential GOP candidate before the 2016 run.

a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

Perry being Perry has done all the damage needed to his future political ambitions

a reply to: LDragonFire

Honestly, I agree. I like Perry's stance on the border, but that's about it. I don't really want him as President. However, that doesn't mean I enjoy watching him get politically prosecuted either.

If all it takes is a DRUNK to 'damage' a republicans political career.

That says more about their critics than it does the 'Perry's'.

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Daughter2
Was bush arrested for drunk driving though? ...

Yes he was.

George Bush arrest record

originally posted by: KilroyRock

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Daughter2
Was bush arrested for drunk driving though? ...

Yes he was.

George Bush arrest record

Yeah and Kennedy killed someone.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

I initially thought Perry was in the wrong before looking into it. After having read about what happened I think Perry was right. He should be applauded for this. I say that not really liking Perry much, or at all really.

originally posted by: KilroyRock

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Daughter2
Was bush arrested for drunk driving though? ...

Yes he was.

George Bush arrest record

Just an aside .. the FOX news people on ATS love to say is Republican and only goes after Democrats was the first to run the story, and a FOX affiliate was the one to uncover it.

originally posted by: KilroyRock

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Daughter2
Was bush arrested for drunk driving though? ...

Yes he was.

George Bush arrest record

Just an aside .. the FOX news people on ATS love to say is Republican and only goes after Democrats was the first to run the story, and a FOX affiliate was the one to uncover it.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: KilroyRock

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Daughter2
Was bush arrested for drunk driving though? ...

Yes he was.

George Bush arrest record

Yeah and Kennedy killed someone.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Being from the Boston area, most people there know that. I kid you not an actual quote is "I don't care how many people he has killed as long as he sticks it to Republicans he gets my vote".

Just so it does not seem I am cherry picking, I had people say they refused to believe a Kennedy could do that, I had people say it was no big deal, I had people say it doesn't matter, never once did anyone change their mind about him.

a reply to: KilroyRock
I stand corrected, I never heard about that before now. Thanks for posting.
For the record I am not a bush fan lol. Slammed bush all the time, slammed clinton all the time etc etc.

originally posted by: ketsuko

If this was a solid or even partially solid accusation, would these people be coming forward to say this is crap so quickly?

Yes, because the left does it just as much. Basically, what ever party hold the current power, tends to abuse the power of their office. In Illinois, it's how corrupt politicians keep getting elected year after year.

I know most of you are focused on whether or not she should hold office but you are missing the point. The issue is the way you get to kick someone out of office. You keep showing her video and it's deflecting from the real issue.

It's a shame this has turned into a left/right thing (and yes, I was guilty of it too). It's a way to take power away from the local level and consolidate it into a few powerful positions.

originally posted by: Daughter2

originally posted by: ketsuko

If this was a solid or even partially solid accusation, would these people be coming forward to say this is crap so quickly?

Yes, because the left does it just as much. Basically, what ever party hold the current power, tends to abuse the power of their office. In Illinois, it's how corrupt politicians keep getting elected year after year.

I know most of you are focused on whether or not she should hold office but you are missing the point. The issue is the way you get to kick someone out of office. You keep showing her video and it's deflecting from the real issue.

Bush was arrested for drunk driving and Ted Kennedy probably was drunk too when that girl died. You can't and shouldn't withhold funding to get someone to leave office.

It's a shame this has turned into a left/right thing (and yes, I was guilty of it too). It's a way to take power away from the local level and consolidate it into a few powerful positions.

This is a cluster going full circle. The whole arrangement is ridiculous, with the Governor in charge of funding for an office that can investigate him for corruption. Perhaps from this the legislature will change the funding for the office. Like to one dollar...

I think little of Perry but am with the Dems that think, morality aside, this is not much of a legal case. What with the legal proceedings, he can get practice thinking on his feet, might get learn better how to remember things, and overall it might win him some votes in the primary.

a reply to: Daughter2

No you are misunderstanding. It's not just the drunk driving. The person in question is in charge of ending corruption, and when arrested, she tried to use corruption to make it go away.

Perry is saying there is no point in funding an anti-corruption position that is itself corrupt. He is right. It's not the drunk driving, it's her using her position and influence for CORRUPTION that is the problem.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Correct and just how corrupt is she, lets look at a past Law suit shall we?
It would seem in 2013 a Mr. O'Brien, initiated a removal suit against Lehmberg, to remove her from office.
Now the payment of the Lawyer fees or I should say, how those fees have been paid is in question.
I'll let the article explain it.

Austin solo Kerry O'Brien, the same man who initiated the removal suit against Lehmberg, filed an ethics complaint against her on Aug. 8. The Texas Ethics Commission has five days to determine to accept or reject it. O'Brien alleged an issue with her campaign finance reports involving more than $227,000 in attorney fees she paid to Austin firm Richards, Rodriguez & Skeith, which defended her against the civil removal suit. She won and remained the district attorney.

He alleged in the complaint that Lehmberg filed a Jan. 15 campaign finance report that covered July 1, 2013, to Dec. 31, 2013.
"This is the period in which she would have incurred significant legal expenses in her defense in the removal lawsuit," wrote O'Brien in his complaint.
He alleged in the complaint, among other things, that one $227,885 expenditure went to Richards, Rodriguez & Skeith for "fees for defense of office."
He alleged there is "no record" of where that money came from. She reported zero contributions on the Jan. 15 report. Before the time period of the Jan. 15 report, Lehmberg reported that she kept $4,108 in maintained contributions.

"That's a common misunderstanding," he said.
The report shows that Lehmberg made three payments on the attorney fee bill that total $16,060, which means she still owes $211,825.
Shack said about the payments, "It's from her own personal funds—still a political expenditure—and she reported it. But it's not from campaign funds—not from campaign contributions."
Lehmberg said she plans raise contributions to help pay the remainder of her attorney fees.

Now read the next Part Closely, This'll tell you all you need to know!!!

Shack said about the complaint, "I expect this will be dismissed. I don't see any basis for it."

Link
Owned By The Libs Or What????

a reply to: FarleyWayne

I don't like Rick Perry at all but he does make some sense sometimes. No doubt about it. He was right to pressure her to resign. I however have issue with him cutting off funding as a retaliatory measure. So If anything he should have been put under review by the legislature via an ethics committee if that was ever possible. This BS indictment is simply to hinder his advancement towards running for President in 2016 in my view.